I don't know why I bothered watching that. I never learn. Firstly the 'balance' was rigged by putting two asians against each other and secondly the 'balance' was further rigged by filling the audience with muslims leading to almost 50-50 where in practice I'd imagine it would be more like 80-20 (but those within that 80% would need assurances that nothing violent would happen to them after voting). Finally, the cartoons vote was a complete cop-out because even with substantial majority the powers that be had censored the showing of the cartoons thus making the point in stone muslims are against free speech.

C4 openly got a majority vote for those cartoons and then for all to see appeased the Islamics. What kind of message is that going to send to Muslims other than "your violence will get results"?

.......and it took a woman in the audience to make the point we're a Christian country. I despair.

When the host said we cant show the pictures did you see some of the faces
of audience who thought why ask us if you cant show us the pictures even though most thought they should be shown. Shami done well to say it ain't just Muslims who are losing the right to freedom of speech. I thought the BNP would have got a mention but I'm glad they didn't. The result was close.
Also it was a shame to see so many whites agree with such rubbish the anti-free speech people were saying.

The pivotal thing for me was two things....One, that Muslims cannot comprehend how we allow others to insult us and what we hold dear, and two, the VOTE hinged on the premise that Muslims were being unfairly picked out.

The second point is crucial to understand, and thats whats wrong with this country and that kind of styled debate.

The audience was primed thoughout the program that it was somehow a highlighted 'pick on Islam' case via them being the 'new jews' 'new blacks' 'new Irish' by the media.

If you dont know the parts about the will to create an Islamic state nomatter where on Earth it is, that not being allowed to criticise Islam and muslims or the teachings of the Prophet LEADS to this dhimmification and eventual Sharia state, Im sure things on the vote would be different.

There is a reason Islam is vilified for free speech issues, and thats because its a highly dangerous religion in terms of the freedoms of other ways of life to carry on existing in its midst.

When Budhists, Sikhs, whatever, start a mission for world domination, and start the increasingly dangerous 'religious beliefs' attitude to topics (ie, that thought or action is against Islam and thus deserved of punishment for deviating) that blinkers them into a box, and humanity into a boxed interpretation of life, then Im sure the door will be swung open to criticise them too.

How can an Audience or society vote on whether Islam is a danger to this countries free speech when they arent presented with their gruesome and unrepenting will to eventually dominate and mirror society to fit the sensitivities of Islam in the meantime etc.

People who are hoodwinked into believing that Islam is a "scapegoat of the moment" for NO reason other than Oil and Bush and Blair etc are at this moment in time a danger to this country via thier ignorance and 'misunderstanding' of the Muslim faith and what THAT means for the rest of mankind who arent Muslim.

We watched it. Wasn't impressed. Islam has become a convenient distraction for voters, to take attention away from the simple fact that the government has failed at all levels to govern effectively for a decade. While time, money and resources are being wasted on this minority group, issues like taxation, education, housing, medical care, you name it, are STILL not being addressed.

"Muslims and Free Speech" is not the most sensible topic to have a debate on, since Muslim don't actually have any political power to silence anyone. The problem isn't the Muslims, but the 'liberals' who insist on toadying to their demands, and go to completely ridiculous lengths not to do anything which they think might 'offend' Muslims. In some ways, these 'liberals' are more 'Islamophobic' than we are, since they're actually convinced that Muslims are offended by things like Christmas lights, when in reality almost none are.

So are Muslims a threat to free speech? The friend of Theo van Gogh argued that people do not want to speak freely for fear of violence from fanatical Muslims, so yes, they are. This obviously doesn’t mean that the majority of Muslims are a threat (however much they may complain about insults to their faith), but there is certainly an element in 'the Muslim community' that is willing to use threats of violence to prevent criticism of their faith. That's just a fact.

It doesn't seem to have worked though, with journalists heaping abuse on Muslims (sometimes explaining that they're only against the 'extremists' and 'fundamentalists', sometimes not) and politicians queuing up to insult veil-wearing Muslim women.

In fact, next time you read a newspaper, read what they say about Muslims, and just imagine if they were to say similar things about any other religion. If you see Post 4 in this thread, I made the point that Jews (certainly not all Jews, but Jewish lobby groups and Jewish individuals) were threatening free speech as well. But could you imagine Channel 4 having a debate entitled “Jews and Free Speech”?! They would be slammed as neo-Nazis, and it would probably be banned under our incitement to racial hatred laws. But it seems that Muslims are the new bad guys, so insulting them is OK.

Quote:

The Dispatches Debate:
Jews and Free Speech

Jon Snow chairs a special Dispatches debate on whether Jews are threatening freedom of speech in the UK. Recent events such as the imprisonment of David Irving for questioning the Jewish version of ‘the Holocaust’, the Liberal Democrat leadership ‘investigating’ MP Jenny Tongue for saying that the pro-Israel lobby had got its grips on the entire Western World, the Jewish-owned media’s incessant condemnation of anyone who acknowledges Jewish power, and the fact that Jewish organisations openly boast that it was Jews that originally pushed for and drafted the anti-free speech race relations act, have all raised an urgent question: whether the Jews have a right to silence people who they don’t like. Jon Snow will question a series of guests who have been directly involved in these controversies.

The ironic thing is, this so-called 'war on terrorism' is nothing but an excuse to destroy our civil liberties. Muslims may want to restrict our freedom of speech, but even the ones that would like to aren't going to any time soon, so there's no real threat from them. The threat to freedom of speech comes from the politicians, the journalists, and other Establishment figures: in effect, it’s the very people who are complaining that ‘Muslim extremists are threatening our freedoms’.

The fact that they wouldn't show the cartoons is interesting. The presenter would have been well aware before the program that they were not going to show the cartoons. I think that may have been put in quite deliberately to influence the opinions of viewers. "Oh, of course these Muslims are against free speech, they can't even show the cartoons because of fear of offending them!" It certainly didn't do the "Muslims are not a threat to free speech" side of the argument any favours. Choosing Kenan Malik as a panellist was also a clever move from (Zionist-controlled) Channel 4. That way, it’s not seen as a racial issue, but Muslims are singled out as a special enemy of freedom. That Black Muslims who was questioned did nothing at all to advance his side's argument. He's surely one of the most irritating people I can think of.

It wasn't the most interesting debate I've seen; about what I expected really.

That basically means most whites feel threatened by Islam because the Muslims vote won the Islam isn't a threat vote and mainly whites were likely to vote it is a threat.

That man(i dont know he's name) He was on a programme last year about immigration and he was arguing for more immigration and it included a racist
song/theme about whites.

Oh,I didn't know that.I don't think it could have been that that I saw him in.If it was,I would be saying the opposite about him.

I just remember him defending a white woman for speaking out against Islam for the way it treats women,to a muslim man,so I didn't think he was that bad.

That black muslim guy was very aggressive,wasn't he? I don't think the programme was a success either.It annoyed me especially when that French woman came on and discussed the republication of the cartoons in the French press.The ignorant sod kept interrupting her.Though,good for her,she made a good last word.